CALENDAR in C.C. No. 1/2016
Principal District & Sessions Judge’s Court, Srikakulam.
Date of Office:Prior to 29.01.2013 Date of complaint:29.01.2013 (Date of FIR) Date of filing of charge sheet:18.09.2015 (Cognizance taken on 19.04.2016) Date of appearance of accused:03.10.2019 Date of release on bail:… Date of commencement of trial:07.11.2019 Date of close of trial:05.03.2020 Date of sentence or order:29.06.2021
Explanation for delay:
On 18.09.2015 charge sheet is filed before this court and the same is taken into cognizance on 19.04.2016. Accused made his appearance on 03.10.2019 on that Presiding Officer of the court on casual leave. On 22.10.2019 accused appeared and charges framed against him. From 07.11.2019 to 17.02.2021 PW.1 to PW.33 are examined and on 17.02.2021 prosecution side evidence is closed. On 05.03.2020, the accused is examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and as the accused reported no defence evidence, trial is closed. Due to Covid- 19, the accused posted from time to time for arguments On 01.02.2021 arguments heard and on 26.09.2021 judgment pronounced. (since the accused was not appeared before the court due to increase of Covid, though in the absence of the accused judgment can be passed but keeping in view of the questioning the accused about the quantum of sentence, as the counsel for the accused filed petitioners to condone his absence and also this court was informed that the accused was arrested by CID Bangalore in Crime No.150/2018 and due to Covid, there is delay in pronouncing the judgment),
Name of the complainant:State represented by the Inspector of Police, Srikakulam II town police station (Crime No. 14/2013 of Srikakulam II town police station).
Name of the accused: Gajjala Chandra Sekhar Gupta, S/o late Yadagiri, 40 years, Vysya by caste, Door No. 49-24-29/5, Krishna Residency, Flat No.5, Ramakrishna Nagar, Sankara matam road, Visakhapatnam, Managing Director, Raaga Avenue Ventures Pvt. Ltd., Srikakulam Branch
The offence complained of:
2 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
Sections 420 of the Indian Penal Code and IPC and Section 5 of the A.P. Protection of Depositors Financial Establishment Act, 1999.
Plea of the accused:Pleaded not guilty.
Finding:Found not guilty for the offence under Section 5 of the A.P. Protection of Depositors Financial Establishment Act, 1999.
Found guilty for the offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
Sentence or order: In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable under Section 5 of A.P. Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishment Act, 1999 and he is acquitted of the said charge under Section 248 (1) of Cr.P.C. The accused is found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and he is convicted of the said charge under Section 248(2) of Cr.P.C.
The accused sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and also shall pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) in default of payment of fine, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The accused is informed about the right of appeal.
The period of detention already undergone by the accused, if any, shall be set off under Section 428 of Cr.P.C.
The Material Objects/MOs.1 to 23 shall be confiscated to state after appeal time is over.
Sd/-G.Ramakrishna,
Prl. District & Sessions Judge, Srikakulam.
Note: The accused paid the fine amount of Rs.3,000/- today. The copy of calendar and judgment is supplied to the accused today at free of cost.
//true copy//
Prl. District & Sessions Judge,
Srikakulam
3 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam. 4 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
IN THE COURT OF PRL. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
SRIKAKULAM.
Present: Sri G. Ramakrishna, Prl. District & Sessions Judge.
TUESDAY, THIS THE 29 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2021
CALENDAR CASE No. 1/2016
Between:
State represented by the Inspector of Police, Srikakulam II town police station.
Complainant. And:
Gajjala Chandra Sekhar Gupta, S/o late Yadagiri, 40 years, Vysya by caste, Door No. 49-24-29/5, Krishna Residency, Flat No.5, Ramakrishna Nagar, Sankaramatam road, Visakhapatnam, Managing Director, Raaga Avenue Ventures Pvt. Ltd., Srikakulam Branch.
….. Accused.
This case came on 01.02.2021 for final hearing before me in the presence of Sri M.Malleswara Rao, learned Public Prosecutor
for the complainant and Sri Ch.Ramprasada Rao and Sri
B.Narasinga Rao, learned Advocate for the accused and having heard both side and stood over till this day for consideration, this court made the following:
JUDGMENT
01.The State represented by the Inspector of Police, Srikakulam
II town police station filed charge sheet against Accused.
02.The case of prosecution in brief is that Vysyaraju Krishnam
Raju (defacto-complainant) and his brother Vysyaraju Bheema
Raju joined in Chits prize amount of Rs.3 lakh and Rs. 1 lakh respectively deposited by them with the accused on 22.10.2012 and 28.10.2012 at Srikakulam on the advice of one Rella Rama
Rao, the agent and one of the Members of Raaga Avenue
Ventures Pvt. Limited, Srikakulam Branch, that if they deposited 5 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
Rs. 1 lakh, the company would give Rs.11,500/- per month for 22 months. One Jada Rajesh alias Baba Panthulu worked as Manager in the said Company. The company authorities informed that after depositing the amount, the company will credit Rs.2,750/- in the back account for one lakh in every week up to five weeks. The depositors contacted over phone and that that they would give the amount by hand directly for every 15 days on the voucher.
The depositors received SMS to the mobile that company will give the amount between 6th January and 8th January and again on 25th
January. Theyn they got suspicion and approached the Manager
Jada Rajesh @ Baba Panthulu and enquired him. Then the
Manager informed that hey also deposited Rs.10lakh and decided to meet the accused at the Head office at Visakhapatnam. He took the depositors to the accused on 22.01.2013. The accused gave two options Agree Form institute belongs to him and if convert to that firm, the company would give Bond papers for two years, otherwise the company would give plots either at Chodavaram or at Nellimarla or another places. The depositors presumed that the plots are not valid and told the accused that they are not interested for the substitute and asked the accused to repay the deposited amount, on that the accused told to them that he would contact within five days. Two days thereafter the depositors received SMS from the accused that the company would pay the due amount by 10.02.2013. Thereafter the News item was published in Andhra Jyothi daily newspaper under caption that “BOARD TIPPESINA RAAGA”. Then the defacto-complainant presented a report to the police at Srikakulam II town police 6 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
station, Srikakulam, based on which the police registered a case in Crime No. 14/2013 under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code by M.Veerakumar, Inspector of Police on 29.01.2013 at 06.00 PM.
The Inspector of Police, IV police station, Visakhapatnam
P.V.S.S.N. Krishna Rao arrested the accused on 06.02.2013 in the presence of mediators Dandu Shyam and Chenuthala
Rammohana Rao and seized the documents concerned in connection with the Crime No. 45/2013 under Sections 420, 406 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5 of the A.P. Protection of
Depositors of Financial Establishment Act, 1999 and Sections 4, 5, 6 R/w 2 (c) 3 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act 1978. The accused also confessed about his involvement in Crime No.14/2013 of Srikakulam II town police station. The accused was produced before the court for judicial remand.
On 13.02.2013 the Inspector of Police P.Radhakrishna obtained P.T.Warrant and produced the accused before the court of Addl. Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class, Srikakulam in connection with the present crime i.e., Crime No.14/2013 of Srikakulam II town police station. From 18.02.2013 to 19.02.2013 the accused was taken to police custody by M.Veerakumar, Inspector of Police.
During interrogation the accused admitted his gukilt in this case in the presence of mediators Baratam Durgaprasada Rao and Jami
Malleswara Rao under the cover of mediators. In the presence of mediators, the Inspector of Police seized the computer accessories i.e., Monitor (Acer company), CPU (Odyssey company), Key board (Odyssey company), one modem, one 7 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
mouse, three wooden tables, one revolving chair, six plastic chairs, three wooden desks, three ceiling fans and land line phone (Leboss company) under the cover of mediators report dt.18.02.2013 between 05.00 PM to 06.00 PM.
The investigation revealed that the accused got registered
Raaga Avenue and Ventures Pvt. Ltd. At Rajendranagar,
Visakhapatnam vide Registered No. U45400AP2012PTC079066 under 1856 Companies Act and the Branch Office opened at
Srikakulam and the accused has collected an amount of
Rs.38,67,900/- from 23 victims by issuing 61 receipts with a fraudulent manner and later closed the firm and thereby cheated the victims and others who were not traced thereby the accused committed the offence punishable under Section 420 of the
Indian Penal Code, Section 5 of the A.P. Protection of Depositors of
Financial Establishment Act, 1999. After completion of investigation, police filed charge sheet.
03.This court (My learned Predecessor) has taken the cognizance of the Offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal
Code and Section 5 of the A.P. Protection of Depositors of
Financial Establishment Act, 1999 against the accused on 19.04.2016.
04.On 22.10.2019, charges for the offence punishable under
Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5 of the A.P.
Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishment Act, 1999, are framed against the accused. When the charges were explained to 8 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
the accused in Telugu, he denied the charges and claimed to be tried.
05.To prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined
PW.1 to PW.33 and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.80 and MOs.1 to 23.
After closure of the prosecution witnesses examination, accused was examined under Section 313, Cr.P.C. with regard to the incriminating evidence against him on 05.03.2020. He denied the evidence. No defence witness was examined, but Exs.D.1 to D.5 are marked on behalf of the accused.
06.Heard both side.
07.The points for determination are:
1.Whether the prosecution able to establish the guilt against the accused for the offences punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code beyond all reasonable doubt?
2.Whether the prosecution able to establish the guilt against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 5 of the A.P. Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishment Act, 1999 beyond all reasonable doubt?
08.POINT Nos.1 and 2:
Since two points are interconnected with each other, this court intends to answer them together.
09.The required proof for the offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code is that the prosecution shall establish that (1) the accused cheated another person (2) that the accused thereby induced 9 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
(a) delivery any property to any person, which property did not belong to the accused; or (b) to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security; or (c) anything which is signed or sealed and can be of doing converted into valuables (3) that he did so dishonestly.
10.With regard to Section 5 of A.P. Protection of Depositors of
Financial Establishment Act, 1999 concerned, the ingredients are there must be a financial establishment, it defaults in return of the deposit either in cash or kind or defaults in payment of interest on deposit as agreed upon, every person responsible for the management of the affairs of the financial establishment including the Manager or Member of it shall be punishable with imprisonment.
11.P.W.1 Vysyaraju Krishnam Raju deposed that on the advice of Rella Rama Rao (PW. 3) approached Jada Rajesh (PW.28) to deposit his money in Raaga Avenues and Ventures Private
Limited, PW.28 alleged Branch Manager of the said company informed to P.W.1 that there are three schemes i.e., (1) Shakti
Plan wherein if the a person deposited Rs.9,900/- the company will pay back an amount of Rs.250/- per week for a period of five weeks (2) Abhaya plan, in that plan one has to deposit Rs.50,000/- then the company will pay back an amount of Rs.1250/- per week for a period of 75 weeks and (3) Thrisul plan, in that plan one has to deposit Rs.1,00,000/- and the company will pay back an 1 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
amount of Rs.2,750/- per week for a period of 75 weeks. He further deposed that on 22.10.2012, he has deposited
Rs.3,00,000/- in Thrisul plan at Rs.1,00,000/- each vide receipt
Nos. 7732 (Ex.P.2), 7733 (Ex.P.3) and 7734 (E.P.4), when he questioned about the security then they assured to get three plots registered in his name for the said amount of Rs.1,00,000/- as security and the registration charges to be born by him. As P.W.1 is not having cash, he did not register the same. He further deposed that the on 17.11.2012 and 27.11.2012, the accused company has deposited Rs.8,500/- each in his account and on another date an amount of Rs.16,500/- thereafter no payments.
12.P.W.2 Vysyaraju Bheema Raju deposed that he also approached P.W.28 Jada Rajesh through P.W.3 Rella Rama Rao, he also deposited an amount of Rs.9,900/- on 12.10.2012 in Shakti
Plan vide receipt No. 7538 (Ex.P.5), on 28.10.201 in Thrisul plan he deposited Rs.1 lakh vide receipt No. 7774(Ex.P.6). Company deposited Rs.250/- twice in his account for the deposit of
Rs.9,900/- and also deposited Rs.2,750/- twice into his account for the deposit of Rs.1,00,000/-.
13.P.W.3 Rella Rama Rao deposed that on 07.09.2012 he deposited Rs.9,900/- vide receipt No. 5812 (Ex.P.7) in Shakti plan, on 25.09.2012 he deposited Rs.1,00,000/- vide receipt No.6545 (Ex.P.8)in Thrishl plan. On 30.09.2012 he deposited Rs.1,00,000/- vide receipt No.6684 (Ex.P.9) and on 05.12.2012 he deposited
Rs.1,00,000/- vide receipt No. 7892 (Ex.P.10). For a period of five weeks, the amounts were deposited into his account by the 1 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
company and later stopped the payments. At the time of deposit of Rs.1,00,000/- in Thrisul plan, the company informed him that for security they will register 100 square yards site, but P.W.3 unable to register the land for want of registration fee. P.W.4 to
P.W.6 also deposited the amount in the company on the advice of
P.W.3.
14.P.W.4 Rella Chinnamma who is no other than mother of
P.W.3 deposed that she deposited Rs.1,00,000/-0 in Raaga
Avenues and Ventures Private Limited vide receipt (Ex.P.11). The company paid the interest for a period of five weeks, thereafter committed default. P.W.5 Rella Alivelu, who is no other than the wife of P.W.3 deposed that on 27.09.2012 she deposited
Rs.1,00,000/- and on 05.11.2012 she deposited another amount of
Rs.1,00,000/- in Raaga Company in Thrisul scheme vide receipts under Ex.P.12 and P.13. For a perid of 5 weeks, an amount of
Rs.2,750/- was deposited in her account per week for both deposits. P.W.6 Deergasi Rajeswari, daughter of P.W.3 deposed that she deposited an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- about 7 years back vide receipt (Ex.P.14). She received an amount of Rs.2,750/- per week for a period of five weeks only.
15.P.W.7 Andhavarapu Aruna Kumari deposed that she deposited an amount of Rs.9,900/- on 01.10.2012 under Ex.P.15 receipt bearing No. 6908, the company paid an amount of
Rs.250/- per week for a period of 5 weeks, later committed default.
1 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
16.P.W.8 Kayala Lakshmana Rao deposed that on 12.11.2012 he deposited Rs.9,900/- vide receipt No. 8009 under Ex.P.16 receipt, he deposited another amount of Rs.9,900/- vide receipt
No. 8010 (Ex.P.17) and the company paid the amount of Rs.500/- per week for a period of five weeks and thereafter committed default.
17.P.W.9 Pandiri Chinna Rao deposed that on 15.10.2012 he deposited Rs.9,900/- vide receipt No. 7637 under Ex.P.18 receipt and on 17.11.2012 he deposited another amount of Rs.1,00,000/- in Thrisul plan vide receipt No.7644 under Ex.P.19 receipt. He received an amount of Rs.3,000/- per week for a period of five weeks, the amount was deposited into his account and later the company committed default.
18.P.W.10 Chakka Ramalakshmi deposed that she deposited an amount of Rs.50,000/- each on 07.09.2012 and 28.09.2012 vide receipt Nos. 5814 (Ex.P.20) and 6705 (Ex.P.21) and the company deposited Rs.1250/- per week in her bank account for a period of five weeks for first deposit and for another the company deposited
Rs.1250/- per week for a period of only two weeks and therefore the company committed default.
19.P.W.11 Potnuru Srinivasa Rao deposed that on 17.10.2012 he deposited Rs.50,000/- in Abhaya scheme vide receipt No. 7665 (Ex.P.22) and later he received an amount of Rs.1250/- per week for a period of five weeks and later the company committed default.
1 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
20. P.W.12 Chitti Venugpala Rao deposed that he deposited
Rs.50,000/- on 21.09.2013 vide receipt No. 6312 (Ex.P.23) and he received an amount of Rs.1250./- per week for a period of five weeks only and later the company committed default.
21.P.W.13 Pedada Ananda Rao deposed that he deposited
Rs.1,00,000/- on 22.08..2013 vide receipt No. 4594 (Ex.P.24) and
Rs.9,900/- on 28.09.2013, Rs.1,00,000/- on 03.10.2012 vide receipt No. 7126 (Ex.P.25) and on 31.10.2012 he also deposited
Rs.9,900/- each under receipts bearing No. 7816, 7817, 7818 and 7819 vide Exs.P.26 to 29 receipts. The accused has issued two bonds by endorsing his signature on Rs.100/- stamp paper, the same are marked as Exs.P.30 and P.31.
22.P.W.14 Pedada Dhanalakshmi, who is no other than the wife of P.W.13 deposed that she deposited Rs.1,00,000/- on 03.10.2012 vide receipt bearing No.7125 (Ex.P.32). She received an amount of Rs.2,750/- per week for a period of five weeks. Along with Ex.P.32 receipt, she was given a bond (Ex.P.33.)
23.P.W.15 Chigurupalli Tejeswaramma who is the mother-in- law of P.W.13 and mother of P.W.14, deposed that on 17.10.2012 she deposited Rs.1,00,000/- vide receipt bearing No.7662 (Ex.P.43) and she received an amount of Rs.2,750/- per week for a period of five weeks.
24.P.W.16 P. Prakash Patro deposed that on 27.10.2012 he deposited Rs.1,00,000/- vide receipt bearing No. 7757 (Ex.P.35), 1 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
on 29.10.2012 he deposited another amount of Rs.1,00,000/- vide receipt bearing No. 7791 (Ex.P.36), on 14.11.2012 he deposited another amount of Rs.1,00,000/- vide receipt bearing No.
8027(Ex.P.37), on 16.11.2012 he deposited Rs.1,00,000/- each vide bearing receipt Nos. 8050, 8051, 8052 and 8053, they are marked as Exs.P.42, 39, 40 and 41 receptively. On 18.11.2012 he deposited an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- under receipt No. 8062 (Ex.P.43), 22.11.2012 he deposited Rs.3,00,000/- under three receipts per Rs.1,00,000/- each and on 23.11.2012 he deposited
Rs.3,00,000/- under three receipts bearing Nos. 8111, 8112 and 8113 they are marked as Exs.P.47 to 49. On 26.11.2012 he deposited Rs.2,00,000/- one lakh each, vide receipts bearing Nos.
8125 and 8126 (Exs.P.51 and P.50). In total he deposited
Rs.17,00,000/- with the accused company. He received an amount of Rs.2,750/- per week for each deposit for a period of five weeks.
25.P.W.17 Chintalapudi Jayalakshmi deposed that she deposited
Rs.1,00,000/- about seven years back vide receipt No. 3990 (Ex.P.52), for a period of five weeks she received an amount of
Rs.2,750/- per week.
26.P.W.18 Valaga Lokesh deposed that he deposited on 17.08.2012 Rs.9,900/- vide receipt No.3989 (Ex.P.53)and received Rs.250/- per week for a period of five weeks.
27.P.W.19 Pandiri Adhimurty deposed that about six years back he deposited Rs.50,000/- vide receipt bearing No.7718 and 1 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
received back an amount of Rs.1250/- per week for a period of five weeks. P.W.19 not produced the alleged receipt bearing
No.7718. P.W.20 Muddada Lakshmi deposed that she deposited
Rs.9,900/- each under receipt bearing Nos. 4678, 4678 and 4680 (Exs.P.54 to 56), she received Rs.250/- each per week for a period of five weeks. PW.19 and PW.20 made their deposits through
P.W.3 Rella Rama Rao. So also P.W.21 Muddada Sankara Rao deposited an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- in the month of October, 2012 vide receipt bearing No. 7777. But no such receipt is filed by
P.W.21. Anyhow, in his evidence in chief he deposed that he received an amount of Rs.2,750/- per week for a period of five weeks.
28.P.W.22 Jada Sridevi who is no other than the wife of P.W.28
Jada Rajesh deposed that on 06.08.2012 she deposited
Rs.1,00,000/- each under three receipt bearing Nos. 3128, 3130 and 3131 (Exs.P.56 to 59) and the Accused has paid Rs.2,750/- per week for a period of five weeks. She further deposed that on 14.11.2012 she also deposited Rs.9,900/- each under two receipts bearing Nos. 8034 and 8035 (Exs.P.60 and 61). The accused did not pay any amount for the deposit of Rs.9,900/-.
29.P.W.29 Jada Satish who is no other than the brother of
P.W.28 Jada Rajesh deposed that on 06.08.2012 he deposited
Rs.9,900/- vide receipt bearing No. 3126 (Ex.P.62), on 20.10.2012 he deposited Rs.9,900/- under receipt bearing No. 7720 (Ex.P.63).
He received an amount of Rs.250/- per week for a period of five 1 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
weeks for the first deposit and Rs.l250/- per week for a period of two weeks only for the 2nd deposit.
30.P.W.24 Rachiraju Navya deposed that she worked as
Receptionist in Raaga Avenues and Ventures Company Ltd,
Srikakulam for a period of four months from 12.08.2012. P.W.28
Rajesh is the Manager of the company who appointed her as
Receptionist. The accused is the Managing Director of the company. She was paid Rs.3,500/- per month as salary by P.W.28
Rajesh. Only first two months, she was paid salary and for the remaining months, she was not paid any salary and therefore she did not attend the office. No appointment letter was issued to her to show that she was appointed as Receptionist. She does not know who deposited the amounts and to whom the amount was paid. The Managing Director and the Manager used to look after the affairs.
31.P.W.25 Bandaru Narayana Rao deposed that he is working as daily wage labour in RIMS Hospital, Srikakulam. He worked as
Boy in Raaga Avenues and Ventures Company for a period of five months from August, 2012. He was paid salary at Rs.2,500./-per month for a period of four months only. P.W.24 was the
Receptionist. The accused is the Managing Director of the said
Company and P.W.28 Rajesh is the Manager. He was also not issued any appointment letter to show that he worked as a Boy in
Raaga Avenues and Ventures Private Ltd., Srikakulam.
1 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
32.P.W.26 Kintali Varadaraja Kumar deposed that he leased out his house to the accused in the month of August, 2012 and the rent for the said house is Rs.5,500/- per month. He does not know whether the accused is used to reside along with his family or he is running a company in the said house. For the period of five months, the accused paid the rent to him. He used to reside at
Visakhapatnam. He was declared as hostile by the learned Public
Prosecutor. In his cross-examination, when it was suggested to him that he stated before the police as in Ex.P.64 Section 161
Cr.P.C. statement, he denied the same and when it was suggested to him that the accused never came to Srikakulam he denied the same.
33.The crucial witness in this case is P.W.28 Jada Rajesh alias
Baba Panthulu. According to his evidence he is Purohit. From
August, 2012 to September, 2012 he worked as Manager in Raaga
Avenues and Ventures Private Limited, Srikakulam. Its head office is situated at Visakhapatnam. The accused is the Managing
Director of the company, which used to collect money from the public under different schemes, thereby they used to collect the deposits from the public through these schemes. They company has gave amounts under all the schemes for a period of five weeks. He also deposited Rs.9,900/- on 31.07.2012 under receipts bearing Nos. 2799 to 2808 i.e., 10 in number. But he deposited only two receipts i.e., bearing No. 2799 (Ex.P.66) and 2808 (Ex.P.67) On 30.9.2012 he deposited Rs.9,900/- vide receipt bearing No. 6857 (Ex.P.68). For five the company paid interest 1 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
and principal. Exx.P.66 to P.68 contain the signature of the accused. According to P.W.28, Ex.P.69 photographs and C.D. were taken at the time of inauguration of Raaga Avenues and Ventures
Private Limited situated at Balaga opposite to RIMS Hospital,
Srikakulam and in the photographs, the accused was present and the meetings were conducted by the accused. With regard to the amounts paid by the accused committed, they deposited amounts in the joint account of PW.28 and his wife/PW.22 vide
Account No. 421104000015039 in IDBI Bank, Srikakulam by way of transfer by the company from S.B.I., Dwaraikanagar Branch,
Visakhapatnam. The statement of the account from 08.08.2012 to 22.12.2012 is marked as Ex.P.70. He used to receive
Rs.7,000/- as salary from the accused. Ex.P.71 is the statement of account issued by ICICI Bank situated at Srikakulam from 01.10.2012 to 31.12.2012. Ex.P.72 is the copy of the bank statement of ICICI Bank, Visakhapatnam branch. Ex.P.73 is counter foils (29 in number) relating to ICICI Bank, Srikakulam showing the transactions from ICICI Bank, Srikakulam Branch. In his cross-examination he admitted that the signatures on Exs.P.2 to 29, 30 to 34, 35 to 40, Exs.P.44 to P.51 and Ex.P.56 are belonging to him. So also the signatures on Exs.P.58 to P.63, 66 to
68. The vouchers under Ex.P.73 relate to the cash deposits by the persons which are to be given to the persons who deposited the amount. When it was suggested to him that the amounts shown under Ex.P.70 relates to the plots business and the accused to do real estate business and P.W.28 worked as an Agent and received amounts as agent for the plots but not received the amounts by 1 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
the accused for the company shown at Visakhapatnam, the said suggestions were denied. P.W.28 was initially shown as an accused in the First Information Report
34.P.W.1 has seen a publication in Andhra Jyothi that “BOARD
THIPPESINS RAAGA”. Then he suspected that he and others were cheated by the accused, on 29.01.2013 he and his brother (PW.2) presented a report to Srikakulam II town police station, which is marked as Ex.P.1.
35.According to P.W.29 Jami Malleswara Rao on 18.02.2013 the
Inspector of Police, II town, Srikakulam police station called him at about 02.00 PM by phone, then he went to the police station at about 02.45 PM, at that time the Inspector of Police, constables and the accused were present in the police station, when the police questioned the accused confessed his guilt as to the commission of the offence. In his confessional statement, he stated that Raaga Avenues and Ventures has developed plots 133 square yards and thereby sold the bits for Rs.1,50,000/-per bit to the public and in order to develop his business, he introduced Sakthi, Trishul and Abhaya plans at Srikakulam, he gave jobs to PW.28 Jada Rajesh, PW.24 Navya and P.W.25
Narayana Rao at Srikakulam by establishing his office, the accused collected the amounts from 40 to 50 persons and sent the collected amounts to Vizag and got deposited at ICICI Bank and he used to purchase the lands with the collected amounts.
The Inspector of Police took him and P.W.29 to the Office situated 2 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
opposite to RIMS Hospital, Srikakulam. As the keys of the office are with PW.28, the police called him and later the Inspector of police opened the lock and went into the house, wherein there were computers, tables 03 in number, 06 plastic chairs, one land phone, 03 ceiling fans, 03 flexes affixed to the wall, wooden desks 03 in number, one revolving chair, they were seized by the police.
One constable scribed the mediators report at 03.00PM. Ex.P.74 is the portion of the confessional statement i.e., “Nannu Tisukuni
Vellithe, Srikakulam Branch nu chupeestanani Office talalu Jada
Rajesh daggaravunnai any teliyajeyaga”. Ex.P.75 is the mediator report drafted on 18.02.2013 between 05.00 PM to 06.00PM. One
ACR monitor, Odyssey CPU, Key board, one modem, one mouse, one land line phone, 03 flexi banners, ceiling fans 3 in number which were seized by the police are marked as MOs 1 to 10. One revolving chair, three wooden tables, three wooden desks, six plastic chairs are marked as MOs. 11 to 23. They were seized by the police in the presence of the mediators from the office of the accused at Srikakulam.
36.As per the evidence of P.W.27 Dandu Syam, who is working as Deputy General Manager at Vizag Steel Plant, Visakhapatnam, he deposed that on 05.02.2013 morning at about 9.30 AM, the
Inspector of Police, 4th town police station, Visakhapatnam called him to the station, then himself and L.W.29 Chenuithula
Rammohana Rao, who was given up by the prosecution, went to the police station, from there they were taken to Raaga Avenues and Ventures situated at 4th floor, Krishna Enclave, Rajendra 2 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
Nagar, Visakhapatnam, at that time the accused and his staff 9 members were available, the police apprehended the accused and seized the records, computers and other furniture of Raaga
Avenues and Ventures Limited under the cover of mediators report (Ex.P.65). Those computers and the furniture were marked in this case. Perhaps the case is only with regard to Srikakulam branch is concerned.
37. The report under Ex.P.1 was given by P.W.1 and P.W.2 received by PW.30 M.Veera Kumar, the then Inspector of Police,
Srikakulam II town police station on 29.01.2013 based on which he registered a case in Crime No. 14/2013 under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. Ex.P.78 is the original First Information
Report. He recorded the statements of the witnesses and collected the receipts from them. He visited the scene of offence i.e., Office of Raaga Avenues and Venture Private Limited,
Srikakulam and prepared Ex.P.79 rough sketch of the scene of offence. On 06.02.2013 he received information about the arrest of the accused at Visakhapatnam in Crime No. 45/2013 under
Sections 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 5 of the
A.P. Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishment Act, 1999 and Sections 4, 5, 6 R/w 2 and 3 of Prize Chits and Money
Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act 1978 of IV Town, Dwaraka
Police station. The attested copy of the First Information Report along with report is marked as Ex.P.80. He applied for P.T.
Warrant against the accused in the Court of Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class, Srikakulam by filing a petition on 08.02.2013. On 2 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
13.02.2013, he produced the accused before the Addl. Judicial
Magistrate of 1st Class Court, Srikakulam. Later, he got orders
from the court and took the accused for police custody for two days. On 18.02.2013 he brought the accused to the police station and got mediators report recorded, seized the material objects in the presence of mediators. In admitted in his cross-examination that there are two persons i.e., accused Gajjala Chandra Sekhar
Gupta and Jada Rajesh (PW.28) in the First Information Report. In the cross-examination of P.W.30, the learned defence counsel elicited Ex.D.1 contradiction with regard to Section 161 Cr.P.C.
statement of P.W.17 that “he also joined as a member in the company and deposited the amounts, on seeking I was also attracted to the scheme”. Ex.D.2 and D.3 contradictions are elicited with regard to Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement of P.W.18 that Ex.D.2 is “ I know Rella Rama Rao” and Ex.D.3 contradiction is “Vysyaraju Krishnam Raju also deposited the amounts in Raga
Company and he was cheated and then he reported to the same
Srikakulam II town police station and I came to know the same.
Through P.W.21 in his cross-examination Ex.D.4 contradiction is marked that” I came to know that P.W.1 Vysyaraju Krishnam Raju,
R/o Gujarathipeta deposited amount in Raaga company and he was cheated by Managing Director G.Chandra Sekhar Gupta and thereby he reported to the police.” Ex.D.5 is contradiction is marked in the Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement of P.W.24 that “I used to give receipts to the customers as it is my responsibility.
It is clearly and categorically admitted by P.W.30 that the entire 2 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
investigation is based on Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
Raaga company is not shown as one of the accused.
38.P.W.31 P.V.V.S.N. Krishna Rao, Inspector of Police, IV town,
Dwaraka police station, Visakhapatnam deposed that he investigated the case in Crime No. 45/2013, he visited the office of Raaga Avenues and Ventures Private Limited at Visakhapatnam in the presence of mediators and seized the material and apprehended the accused in the presence of the mediators under the cover of mediators report. Of course, the above Crime No.
45/2013 is differently shown from the present case. They are two different cases. Not linked or joint together.
39.P.W.32 P.Radha Krishna is the successor of P.W.30, he continued the investigation in this case, he filed the charge sheet against the accused on 22.10.2013 under Section 420 of the
Indian Penal Code and Section 5 of the A.P. Protection of
Depositors of Financial Establishment Act, 1999. When it was suggested to him that he is not competent to file the charge sheet under Section 5 of the A.P. Protection of Depositors of Financial
Establishment Act, 1999, he denied it. According to the learned defence counsel, the Additional D.G.P., CID is competent authority to investigate and file the charge sheet under A.P. Protection of
Depositors of Financial Establishment Act, 1999. When the same was suggested to P.W.32, he denied it.
40.P.W.33 D.Mohana Rao, Inspector of Police, Srikakulam II town police station deposed that he took investigation in this case 2 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
on 24.01.2015, he filed the revised charge sheet on 20.08.2015 after complying the objection. In his cross-examination he admitted that in the First Information Report, two accused i.e.,
Chandrasekhara Gupta and Jada Rajesh (PW.28) were shown as accused. He also admitted that P.W.30 done investigation only for the offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The other Managing Directors and also the company are not shown as an accused in this case. As per the charge sheet, P.W.32 brought the accused to the court on P.T.Warrant. As per the charge sheet,
P.W.30 has deleted P.W.28 Jada Rajesh as accused. He also denied the suggestion that only the Additional Deputy General of
Police is the competent authority to investigate and file the charge sheet as per A.P. Protection of Depositors of Financial
Establishment Act, 1999 but not the Inspector of Police.
41.Though the Prosecution witnesses i.e., depositors stated in their evidence in chief that directly they have deposited the amount with the accused, but the same is an omission, there is no statement in their Section 161 Cr.P.C. statements as admitted by
PW.30/Investigating Officer. Any how it is admitted by the accused by way of suggestions that there is Raaga Avenues and Ventures
Private Limited in Visakhapatnam. The accused denied that there is a branch situated at Srikakulam and P.W.28 is its Manager.
P.W. 3 Rella Rama Rao who worked in Agrigold as an agent for some time, introduced P.W.28 to P.W.1 to P.W.2, P.Ws.4 to P.W.6 so also to PW.18 and P.W.19. In his cross-examination, P.W.3 stated that as a security he was issued four Rs.100/- stamp 2 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
papers with the signatures of the accused. When he was examined before the court on 07.11.2019, the stamp papers were not marked but on 07.01.2020 he was recalled and in his further chief-examination Exs.P.76 and P.77 Letters of undertakes were filed. It is admitted by P.W.3 that there is no reference about
Exs.P.7 to P.10 Exs.P.76 and P.77. It is also mentioned in Exs.P.76 and P.W.77 that the amount was paid for the purpose of lands.
When it is suggested that Exs.P.76 and P.77 are no way related to the amounts alleged to be paid at Srikakulam, he denied the same. But the contents in Exs.P.76 and P.77 are show that the plot advance paid at Chodavaram and the plot advance paid is
Rs.1,00,000/-.
42.By way of suggestions it is admitted case of the accused that Raaga Avenues and Ventures Private Limited is established in
Visakhapatnam, dealing with real estate business but not with the finance business. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the accused that even Exs.P.76 and P.77 are issued only with regard to the real estate business, but not for the financial business. The receipts do not contain the signatures of the accused, though containing the signatures of P.W.28 Rajesh, there is no responsibility on the part of the accused either in receiving the amounors by the accused. It is only for P.W.28. The accused is no way connected with the alleged branch of Raaga Avenues and
Ventures at Srikakulam and therefore the accused is entitled for acquittal. In addition to that with regard to Section 5 of the A.P.
Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishment Act, 1999 is 2 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
concerned, the Inspector of Police is not competent to investigate this case or to file the charge sheet and therefore it is defective one, for that also the accused is entitled for acquittal.
43.On the other hand it is submitted by the learned Public
Prosecutor that the evidence of P.W.24 Racharaju Navya, P.W.25
Bandaru Narayana Ra, the evidence of P.W.28 Rajesh coupled with Exs.P.69 photographs, Exs.P.70, 71, 72 bank statements,
Exs.P.73 counter foils 29 in number are clinchingly showing that
P.W.24, PW.25 and P.W.28 worked for Raaga Avenues and
Ventures Private Limited at Srikakulam branch and there was a grand opening and a meeting was also held with the public by the accused, they are clinchingly and clearly establishing that the accused did transactions for Raaga Avenues and Ventures Private
Limited at Srikakulam and therefore the prosecution established the guilt against the accused for both the offences punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5 of A.P.
Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishment Act, 1999.
44.With regard to the launching of the prosecution is concerned, Section 4 (1) of A.P. Protection of Depositors of
Financial Establishment Act, 1999 says that the Government may, by notification appoint an authority hereinafter called "the competent authority" to exercise control over the properties attached by the Government under Section 3 and Section 4 (2) says the Competent Authority shall have such other powers and discharge such other functions as may be prescribed, in addition to the powers and functions specified under this Act.
2 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
Section 5 (2) of A.P. Protection of Depositors of Financial
Establishment Act, 1999 says where the competent authority is satisfied or has reason to believe that the financial establishment has committed a default punishable under Section5 of the act, the competent authority shall be competent to launch prosecution
before the Special Court against the financial establishment and
any person responsible for the management of the affairs of the financial establishment including the promoter, manager or member of the financial establishment for levy of penalty under
Section 5 of the A.P. Protection of Depositors of Financial
Establishment Act, 1999. Thereafter by virtue of G.O.Ms.No. 91 dt.25.05.2017, Sub rule 3 of A.P. Protection of Depositors of
Financial Establishment Act, 1999 (sic) for the words “competent authority shall be competent to launch the prosecution” the words “competent authority shall authorize investigating officer to launch prosecution” shall be substituted. So, now it is not the competent authority to launch prosecution but the competent authority shall authorize the Investigating Officer to launch the prosecution. This is the case filed by the Inspector of Police,
Srikakulam II town police station whose authority was questioned by cross-examination.
45.Therefore, this court is of the opinion that as the
Investigating Officer himself is not authorized to investigate and file charge sheet under Section 5 of the A.P. Protection of
Depositors of Financial Establishment Act, 1999, this court can say that the prosecution fails to establish the guilt against the 2 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
accused for the above section. Therefore, the accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable under Section 5 of the A..P.
Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishment Act, 1999.
46.As the Inspector of Police either PW.30 or P.W.32 and P.W.33 there were not specially authorized to proceed under A.P.
Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishment Act, 1999, they are not competent to investigation and filed the charge sheet against the accused. In addition to that the alleged company is not shown as an accused in this case. However, as referred above the documents Exs.P.69 Photographs, Exs.P.70 to 72 bank statements and Ex.P.73 counter foils 29 in number they are establishing that through P.W.28 Jada Rajesh, the accused collected the amounts from the public, though he paid back the instalments as agreed only for five months, later he stopped the payments thereby the accused cheated the public. Therefore, it can be said that the prosecution clearly established the guilt of the accused for the offence punishable under Section 420 of the
Indian Penal Code, for which he is liable to be punished.
The points are answered accordingly.
47.In the result, the accused is found not guilty for the offence punishable under Section 5 of A.P. Protection of Depositors of
Financial Establishment Act, 1999 and he is acquitted of the said charge under Section 248 (1) of Cr.P.C. The accused is found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian
Penal Code and he is convicted of the said charge under Section 248(2) of Cr.P.C.
2 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected
and pronounced by me in open court this the 29th day of June, 2021.
Sd/-G.Ramakrishna
Principal District & Sessions Judge,
Srikakulam.
In view of the case facts and circumstances, the accused is not entitled the benefit of Probation of Offenders Act.
When the accused is questioned he submitted that he is having son aged about 15 years, daughter aged about 13 years, mother aged about 62 years and wife and prayed this court to take a lenient view.
In view of the above submission of the accused, a lenient view is taken, but at the same time this is an offence committed by the accused against the public at large.
Keeping in view of the interest of the society also the accused is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and also shall pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand only) in default of payment of fine, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal
Code.
The accused is informed about the right of appeal.
The period of detention already undergone by the accused, if any, shall be set off under Section 428 of Cr.P.C.
The Material Objects/MOs.1 to 23 shall be confiscated to state after appeal time is over.
Pronounced by me in open court while dictating to the
Stenographer, typed by him, corrected and signed by me this the 29th day of June, 2021.
3 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
Sd/-G.Ramakrishna,
Principal District & Sessions Judge,
Srikakulam.
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED
For Prosecution: For Defence: -NIL-
P.W.1:Vysyaraju Krishnam Raju
P.W.2:Vysyaraju Bheema Raju
P.W.3:Rella Ramarao
P.W.4:Rella Chinnammadu
P.W.5:Rella Alivelu
P.W.6:Deergasi Rajeswari
P.W.7:Andavarapu Aruna Kumari
P.W.8:Kayala Lakshmana Rao
P.W.9:Pandiri Chinnarao
P.W.10: Chakka Ramalakshmi
P.W.11: Potnuru Srinivasa Rao
P.W.12: Chitti Venugopala Rao
P.W.13: Pedda Ananda Rao
P.W.14: Pedada Dhanalaxmi
P.W.15: Chigurupalli Tejeswaramma
P.W.16: P.Prakash Pathro
P.W.17: Chinthalapudi Jayalakshmi
P.W.18: Valaga Lokesh
P.W.19: Pandiri Adhimurthy
P.W.20: Muddada Lakshmi
P.W.21: Muddada Sankara Rao
P.W.22: Jada Sridevi
P.W.23: Jada Sathish
P.W.24: Rachiraju Navya
P.W.25: Bandaru Narayana Rao
P.W.26: Kinthali Varadaraja Kumar
P.W.27: Dandu Syam, Dy. General Manager, Vizag Steel Plant
P.W.28: Jada Rajesh @ Baba Panthulu, Manager, Raga Avenues and Ventures Private Limited at Srikakulam.
3 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
P.W.29: Jami Malleswara Rao, Inspector of police,II Town police station.
P.W.30: M.Veerakumar, Inspector of Police
P.W.31: P.V.V.S.N.Krishna Rao, Inspector of Police
P.W.32: P.Radha Krishna, Inspector of Police (Retired )
P.W.33: D.Mohana Rao, Inspector of Police, Crime Investigation Department.
DOCUMENTS MARKED
For Prosecution:
Ex.P.122.10.2012 Original complaint given by PW.1 to the II Town Police.
Ex.P.222.10.2012 Original receipt No.7732 handed over by PW.1 to the police.
Ex.P.322.10.2012 Original receipt No.7733 handed over by PW.1 to the police.
Ex.P.422.10.2012 Original receipt No.7734 handed over by PW.1 to the police.
Ex.P.512.10.2012 Receipt No.7538 of PW.2
Ex.P.628.10.2012 Receipt No.7774 of PW.2
Ex.P.707.09.2012 Receipt No.5812 issued by LW.24/Jada Rajesh to Pw.3.
Ex.P.825.09.2012 Receipt No.6545 issued by LW.24/Jada Rajesh to PW.3
Ex.P.930.09.2012 Receipt No.6884 issued by LW.24/Jada Rajesh to PW.3.
Ex.P.1005.11.2012 Receipt No.7892 issued by LW.24/Jada Rajesh to PW.3.
Ex.P.1101.10.2012 Receipt No.6936 of PW.4 issued by accused
Ex.P.1227.09.2012 Receipt No.6632 of PW.5 issued by accused
Ex.P.1305.11.2012 Receipt No.7893 of PW.5 issued by accused
Ex.P.1417.10.2012 Receipt No.7663 of PW.6 issued by accused
Ex.P.1501.10.2012 receipt No.6908 issued by accused to PW.7
Ex.P.1612.11.2012 Receipt No.8009 issued by accused to PW.8
Ex.P.1712.11.2012 receipt No.8010issued by accused to PW.8
Ex.P.1815.10.2012 Receipt No.7637 issued by accused to PW.9
Ex.P.1917.10.2012 Receipt No.7667 issued by accused to PW.10
Ex.P.2007.09.2012 Receipt No. 5894 issued by accused to PW.10
Ex.P.2128.09.2012 Receipt No.6708 issued by accused to PW.10
Ex.P.2217.10.2012 Receipt No.7665 issued by accused to PW.11 3 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
Ex.P.2321.09.2012 receipt No.6312 issued by accused to PW.12
Ex.P.2428.09.2012 receipt No.4594 issued by accused to PW.13
Ex.P.2503.10.2012 receipt No.7126 issued by accused to PW.13
Ex.P.2631.10.2012 receipt No.7816 issued by accused to PW.13
Ex.P.2731.10.2012 receipt No.7817 issued by accused to PW.13
Ex.P.2831.10.2012 receipt No.7818 issued by accused to PW.13
Ex.P.2931.10.2012 receipt No.7819 issued by accused to PW.13
Ex.P.3006.09.2012 Rs.100/- Bond paper issued by accused to PW.13
Ex.P.3106.09.2012 Rs.100/- Bond paper issued by accused to PW.13
Ex.P.3203.10.2012 Receipt No.7125 issued by accused to PW.14
Ex.P.3306.10.2012 Rs.100/- Bond was issued by accused in favour of PW.14.
Ex.P.3417.10.2012 Receipt No.7662 issued by accused to PW.15
Ex.P.3527.10.2012 Receipt No.7757 issued by accused to PW.16
Ex.P.3629.10.2012 Receipt No.7791 issued by accused to PW.16
Ex.P.3714.11.2012 Receipt No.8027 issued by accused to PW.16
Ex.P.3814.11.2012 Receipt No.8026 issued by accused to PW.16
Ex.P.3916.11.2012 Receipt No.8051 issued by accused to PW.16
Ex.P.4016.11.2012 Receipt No.8052 issued by accused to PW.16
Ex.P.4116.11.2012 Receipt No.8053 issued by accused to PW.16
Ex.P.4216.11.2012 Receipt No.8050 issued by accused to PW.16
Ex.P.4318.11.2012 Receipt No.8062issued by accused to PW.16
Ex.P.4422.11.2012 Receipt No.8087 issued by accused to PW.16
Ex.P.4522.11.2012 Receipt No.8086 issued by accused to PW.16
Ex.P.4622.11.2012 Receipt No.8088 issued by accused to PW.16
Ex.P.4723.11.2012 Receipt No.8111 issued by accused to PW.16
Ex.P.4823.11.2012 Receipt No.8112 issued by accused to PW.16
Ex.P.4923.11.2012 Receipt No.8113 issued by accused to PW.16
Ex.P.5026.11.2012 Receipt No.8126 issued by accused to PW.16
Ex.P.5126.11.2012 Receipt No.8125 issued by accused to PW.16
Ex.P.5217.08.2012 Receipt No.3990 issued by accused to PW.17
Ex.P.5317.08.2012 Receipt No.3989 issued by accused to PW.18
Ex.P.5423.08.2012 Receipt No. 4678 issued by accused to PW.20
Ex.P.5523.08.2012 Receipt No. 4679 issued by accused to PW.20
Ex.P.5623.08.2012 Receipt No. 4680 issued by accused to PW.20
Ex.P.5706.08.2012 Receipt No.3128 issued by accused to PW.22
Ex.P.5806.08.2012 Receipt No.3130 issued by accused to PW.22
Ex.P.5906.08.2012 Receipt No.3131 issued by accused to PW.22
Ex.P.6014.11.2012 Receipt No.8034 issued by accused to PW.22 3 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
Ex.P.6114.11.2012 Receipt No.8035 issued by accused to PW.22
Ex.P.6206.08.2012 Receipt No.3126 issued by accused to PW.23
Ex.P.6320.10.2012 Receipt No.7720 issued by accused to PW.23
Ex.P.6419.02.2013 161 Cr.P.C Statement of PW.26
Ex.P.6506.02.2013 Mediators report scribed in between 10.00 a.m., to evening 4.00 p.m., endorsed the signatures of Pw.27 along with the Inspector of police, LW.20/ Muddada Laxmi and accused.
Ex.P.6631.07.2012 Receipt No.2799 of PW.28 handover by him to the police.
Ex.P.6731.07.2012 Receipt No.2808 of PW.28 handed over by him to the police.
Ex.P.6830.09.2012 Receipt No.6857 of PW.28 handed over by him to the police.
Ex.P.69-Photographs 14 in number along with Compact Disc.
Ex.P.7016.09.2018 The Bank Statement of PW.28 in IDBI Bank , Srikakulam from 08.08.2012 to 22.12.2012.
Ex.P.7131.12.2012 The Bank Statement of accused A/c from ICICI Bank, Srikakulam.
Ex.P.7231.12.2012 The Bank Statement of accused A/c from ICICI bank taken from Dwarakanagar Branch, Visakhapatnam.
Ex.P.73-Counter foils 29 in number
Ex.P.7418.02.2013 Admissible portion of accused in confession as “Nannu Tisukuni velithe Srikakulam Branchnu chupeestanani office talalu Jada Rajesh daggara vunnai ani teliyajeyaga”.
Ex.P.7518.02.2013 Mediator report was scribed in between 5.00 p.m., to 6.00 p.m.
Ex.P.7606.10.2012 The Letter of under taking issued by M/s Raga Avenues and Ventures Private Limited, infavour of PW.3
Ex.P.7706.10.2012 Another letter of undertaking issued by Raga Avenues and Ventures Private Limited, infavour of PW.3.
Ex.P.7829.01.2013 Original First Information Report in Crime No.14/2013 of Srikakulam II town Police station for the offence under section 420 of IPC.
Ex.P.7930.01.2013 Rough Sketch
Ex.P.8001.02.2013 Attested copy of First Information Report in Crime No.45/2013 under Section 420, 406 IPC and Sec.5 of A.P.P.D.F.E. Act and u/Sec.4, 5, 6 r/ w 2, 3 of Prized Chits and Money Circulations Scheme Act, 1978 of IV Town P.S., 3 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
For Defence:
Ex.D.105.02.2013 Contradiction portion in 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW.17
Ex.D.205.02.2013 Contradiction portion in 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW.18
Ex.D.305.02.2013 Contradiction portion in 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW.18
Ex.D.405.02.2013 Contradiction portion in 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW.21
Ex.D.519.02.2013 Contradiction portion in 161 Cr.P.C statement of PW.24.
MATERIAL OBJECTS
M.O.1Monitor Acer Company
M.O.2CPU Odyssey company
M.O.3Key Board
M.O.4One Modem
M.O.5One mouse
M.O.6One land line phone
M.O.703 (three) flexi banners
M.O.8Ceiling fan
M.O.9Ceiling fan
M.O.10Ceiling fan
M.O.11One revolving chair
M.O.12Wooden table
M.O.13Wooden table
M.O.14Wooden table
M.O.15Wooden desk
M.O.16Wooden desk
M.O.17Wooden desk
M.O.18Plastic chair
M.O.19Plastic chair
M.O.20Plastic chair
M.O.21Plastic chair
M.O.22Plastic chair
M.O.23Plastic chair.
3 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.
Sd/-G.Ramakrishna,
Prl.District & Sessions Judge, Srikakulam.
// True copy//
Prl.District & Sessions Judge, Srikakulam.
3 C.C. No. 1/2016, Dt.29.06.2021PDJ Court, Srikakulam.